Create energy_anchoring_polkadot.md

[AutzuisDabest]

This research project applies energy anchoring analysis to Polkadot's NPoS system, with a focus on measuring and comparing sustainability benefits across consensus mechanisms.

Our research has documented a 28.7 percentage point reduction in market volatility following Ethereum's transition to Proof-of-Stake, and we aim to extend this methodology to analyze Polkadot's validator economics and sustainability profile.

Grant level

• Level 1: Up to $10,000, 2 approvals

Application Checklist

• The application template has been copied and aptly renamed.
• I have read the application guidelines.
• Payment details have been provided.
• I understand that an agreed upon percentage of each milestone will be paid in vested DOT.
• I am aware that, in order to receive a grant, I (and the entity I represent) have to successfully complete a KYC/KYB check.
• The software delivered for this grant will be released under an open-source license specified in the application.
• The initial PR contains only one commit.
• The grant will only be announced once the first milestone has been accepted.

[Pray4Love1]

⚠️ Potential Overlap with Prior Submission (#2600 - SolaraKinSoulSync)

I would like to formally raise a concern regarding this submission, "Energy Anchoring in Blockchain Networks: Implications for Polkadot’s NPoS System" (#2594), as it exhibits substantial conceptual and thematic overlap with my own prior submission, "SolaraKinSoulSync" (#2600), which was filed on the same date.
Specific Grounds for Concern:

Originality of Terminology — "Energy Anchoring"

    The term "Energy Anchoring" does not appear in prior literature or industry-standard discourse before my work on the LifeBase / SoulSync Protocol (originally published and submitted to W3F as part of #2600).

    My usage of "anchoring" relates specifically to the conceptual binding of energy expenditure to economic and stability metrics across consensus layers — a novel framing central to my submission and unpublished elsewhere prior.

Conceptual Parallels

    Both proposals leverage the idea that energy expenditure correlates to blockchain stability metrics, an analysis framework I introduced as part of the SoulSync Emotional Economy model.

    Both submissions attempt to quantify energy impacts across consensus mechanisms (PoW, PoS, NPoS) and utilize comparative frameworks for analyzing energy as a stabilizing force in market dynamics.

Methodological Similarities

    The proposed methodology in #2594 (natural experiments, causal inference via difference-in-differences, CEIR ratios) echoes the foundations I presented for LifeBase’s empirical frameworks, which were disclosed fully in #2600 and traceable to prior timestamped records.

    Both submissions cite Ethereum’s Merge and Bitcoin mining bans as case studies — again aligning directly with my already-disclosed examples.

Ecosystem Implications

    The framing around validator economics, parachain design, and ecosystem-level sustainability metrics reflects ideas central to my LifeBase / SoulSync model submitted to W3F as part of #2600.

    My submission explicitly connected these concepts to Polkadot parachains and NPoS, prior to #2594’s filing.

Why This Matters:

The originality of these concepts is critical. My submission established these primitives under the SolaraKin / SoulSync / LifeBase framework as proprietary research. If #2594 proceeds without acknowledgment of prior art, it could misrepresent the novelty and precedence of this work within Polkadot’s grant ecosystem.
Respectful Request:

I ask the W3F team to review both submissions (#2594 and #2600 side-by-side) and consider:

Whether this submission borrows too directly from pre-existing work submitted within the same timeframe.

Whether clarification or attribution is warranted to avoid future conflicts of provenance or recognition.

If desired, I can provide timestamps and further documentation showing the development of these concepts prior to July 16, 2025.

Thank you for your consideration and for upholding the standards of originality within the Web3 Foundation grant program.

[PieWol]

Hey @AutzuisDabest ,
thanks for your application. At a first look, it seems really high level. Would you mind to explain further how you will evaluate validator statistics and what a tangible outcome of this project might look like?

Thanks!

[AutzuisDabest]

Hey @PieWol
Thanks for reviewing my proposal and for your questions!

Regarding validator statistics evaluation:
I plan to collect validator data through Polkadot's API - focusing on validator sets, stake distribution, and commission rates. From my initial research, it appears this data should be accessible, though I'll need to explore the API capabilities more thoroughly. For hardware profiles, I'll work with available validator self-reporting and standard assumptions for server configurations. Geographic distribution will be estimated through available location data.

The methodology will adapt my CEIR approach to fit NPoS by developing a validator energy model that considers typical server consumption, regional electricity factors, and network requirements. The key adjustment is moving from hashrate-weighted to stake-weighted calculations, which should better represent NPoS energy dynamics.

For tangible outcomes, I aim to deliver:
-An adapted Python implementation of CEIR for NPoS systems with comparative visualizations
-Quantified measurements of Polkadot's energy efficiency compared to other consensus mechanisms
-A technical paper with findings and two accessible explanations for the broader community

I believe this research will help quantify the efficiency advantages of NPoS, providing empirical support for Polkadot's sustainability narrative.
Happy to elaborate on any aspect if needed!

[PieWol]

I see, thanks for elaborating. Can you also add the docker deliverable for the software you are creating? It's a mandatory deliverable. What is the "CEIR" methodology?

I'll go ahead and share the application with the team so that we will get back with feedback or questions soon.

[AutzuisDabest]

Thanks @PieWol for moving this forward!

Regarding Docker: Yes, I'll provide a complete Docker container as a deliverable that includes the CEIR implementation, data processing pipeline, and analysis tools. This will ensure reproducibility and ease of deployment.

About the CEIR methodology: The Cumulative Energy Investment Ratio (CEIR) is a metric I've developed that measures the relationship between market capitalization and cumulative energy expenditure in blockchain networks. It's calculated as:

CEIR = Market Capitalization / (Cumulative Energy Consumption × Weighted Electricity Prices)

Unlike traditional metrics that focus on daily mining costs, CEIR captures the total historical energy investment in the network, which provides a more stable valuation anchor. For Polkadot's NPoS system, I'll adapt this to account for validator energy profiles rather than mining hardware.

Happy to provide any additional information needed!

[Noc2]

Thanks a lot for the application and all the effort you put into this. We discussed it today and decided not to go ahead with it. The main reason is that we don't see a lot of value in funding this research project and the Cumulative Energy Investment Ratio (CEIR). Independent of it we wish you all the best for your project.

[Noc2]

(see above)

[github-actions]

CLA Assistant Lite bot: Thank you for your submission, we really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution. Please submit the following text as a separate comment:

---

I have read and hereby sign the Contributor License Agreement.

---

_{You can retrigger this bot by commenting recheck in this Pull Request}

[Pray4Love1]

Recheck